SCOTTISH Greens co-convenor Patrick Harvie will this week propose amendments to licensing boards' objectives after the controversial closure of Glasgow nightclub and arts venue The Arches.
In the debate on Thursday Harvie, an MSP for Glasgow, will move to add “promoting social and cultural life” to the licensing objectives taken into consideration when reviewing a site’s licence.
Harvie claimed the decision to take away the city centre venue’s late licence was “incredibly short-sighted”, going on to say that we need “much more” than just warm words from the Government.
The MSP said: “The loss of The Arches has been terrible for staff and for the cultural fabric of our biggest city. The venue showed consistent responsibility on safety issues, and the decision to restrict its licence, which led directly to its closure, was incredibly short-sighted.
“It would be absurd to imagine that recreational drug use will be reduced because of this decision, or that public safety will be helped in any way.
"All that will happen is that people will switch to other, perhaps less experienced and less responsible, venues. This attitude to licensing is compounding the failures of this country’s drug laws.
“Sadly, this chance to change the law comes too late for The Arches itself. There have been warm words from the Scottish Government but we need much more than that."
A protest lobby against the closure has now formed and a petition with nearly 40,000 signatures is calling for the venue to have its late licence reinstated.
Over 1,000 people have said they will attend a protest planned for this Friday at 9am, when the licensing board meets at the City Chambers just off George Square.
Over 400 artists and musicians also signed an open letter last month calling for a rethink.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here